Uncategorized

Ticking Time Bombs For The NRA

April 8, 2025 by 2 Comments

When Bill Brewer and his crew resigned from legal representation of the NRA they left behind some ticking time bombs that could have a severe financial impact. I will take them in order and you can make your own judgment as to the financial impact upon the NRA. As it is, I cannot for the life of me see why an attempt to settle some or all has not been attempted.

First, we have the case of Under Wild Skies v. National Rifle Association. This is a Virginia state court case in which a jury awarded Under Wild Skies approximately $550,000 for breach of contract. Both sides appealed the award and verdict to the Virginia Court of Appeals. Under Wild Skies argued that the circuit court had erred by rejecting a proposed jury instruction regarding anticipatory breach of contract. In other words, they are arguing the NRA had an obligation to pay for all the contracted episodes regardless of whether they had yet been produced or not. Meanwhile, the NRA argued the court should have set aside the verdict in favor of Under Wild Skies given its affirmative defense of fraudulent billing and should have allowed the NRA to recoup its losses. The Court of Appeals rejected both sides arguments and affirmed the circuit court’s verdict.

Here is where it now gets interesting. Both sides again appeal and the Virginia Supreme Court decided that they will take the case. The case is on the docket for the court’s April session and arguments will be heard on April 15th. Brewer along with the Virginia firm of Briglia Hundley had handled the NRA’s side up through the Court of Appeals. Brewer is gone and Robert Cox of Whiteford, Taylor, and Preston is the new co-counsel. One reason the court may have taken the appeal is to rule on the doctrine of reasonable assurances which no Virginia court has done. The granted appeal summary seems to indicate the court may be favoring Under Wild Skies’ arguments. If Under Wild Skies wins on appeal, the cost to the NRA could range upwards of $17 million.

The second case is Dell’Aquila v. NRA which recently was allowed to go forward and for which Dell’Aquila can begin discovery. As noted in the earlier post, while Brewer attorneys had produced all the motions filed on behalf of the NRA in this case which Judge Campbell denied, they have been replaced by a Nashville firm. That this case even reached discovery is somewhat remarkable when one considers that it was originally filed pro se and then David Dell’Aquila had to switch attorneys midstream. According to the Third Amended Complaint, damages are greater than $5 million which could be tripled if RICO fraud is proved. I really don’t think this case was taken that seriously for a long time and now suddenly it is. Imagine how much cheaper it would have been if Bill Brewer had said to Wayne, “Just give the guy his money back, pay his attorney’s fees, and be done with it.”

The third case was brought by the NRA against Ackerman McQueen and Mercury Group for breach of contract for disclosing the Confidential Settlement Agreement in which the NRA agreed to pay AckMac $12,250,000 to settle an earlier case. This case has been going on since September 2022. If memory serves, this agreement was kept from the NRA Board of Directors and they were not allowed to see it. However, the CSA is out in the public domain now and has been due to an inadvertent filing of it as an exhibit by attorneys from Brewer, Attorneys and Counselors. Attorneys from that firm withdrew effective February 27, 2025 and have been replaced by the Dallas firm of Foley and Lardner. The NRA is still attempting to keep the signatories to the agreement agreement under court seal even though it is now in the public domain. The question has to asked why the heck hasn’t the NRA moved to dismiss the case and why are they even bothering to bother to keep the signatories under seal. The signatures are out there and it seems that it is a waste of money to keep them under seal. Doug Hamlin, NRA General Counsel Michael Blaz, and the Legal Affairs Committee of the Board ought to cut our losses and move on.

CLARIFICATION: After I wrote this post, I had a long conversation with a reform director. He explained the rationale for keeping the CSA and other proceedings under seal even though it had been made public earlier was that it was always meant to be under seal, that the breach of confidentiality was in error, and that the NRA contends that Tony Makris and Under Wild Skies are inseparable. I do note the the judge in this case did approve an order on April 1st to keep it under seal. He went on to say that discussions were ongoing to resolve all three of the above cases. As he has always been upfront with me, I will take him at his word.

Finally, there is the anticipated lawsuit from Oliver North for malicious prosecution. To my knowledge it has not been filed yet but I do keep looking. However, the reputational damage along with the accusations of “greed”, “extortion”, and “blackmail” contained in Tom King’s ethics complaint when added to the whistleblower retaliation that the jury found in the AG’s case could induce Col. North to ask for millions.

All four of these pending or potential lawsuits could end up costing the NRA millions of dollars that it really doesn’t have to waste. An attorney who was working in the best interest of his client should have urged settlement in the early stages rather than to let the issues fester so that the billings could increase. These cases need to go away and the NRA’s leadership needs to take the necessary steps to conclude them.

Uncategorized

Ollie North To Sue NRA For Malicious Prosecution

April 4, 2025 by 6 Comments

An email went out yesterday from the NRA’s Office of General Counsel to staff and directors telling them to preserve documents. This was because former NRA President Lt. Col. Oliver North would be filing suit against the NRA for “malicious prosecution” tomorrow. While I have seen the email on document preservation, I have not seen the complaint from North’s intended lawsuit nor do I know in which court the case will be tried.

This motivated me to go back and read through the documents in the case the NRA filed against Oliver North in 2020 in Albany, New York. The NRA sought a declaratory judgment from the court that New York Non-Profit Corporation Law did not prevent the NRA from following its bylaw process for expelling Col. North if found guilty of an ethics complaint filed by Director Tom King. This case was dismissed on March 7, 2025 by mutual agreement of the NRA and Col. North.

Prior to the case being dismissed, Col. North had moved for summary judgment in his favor given the outcome of the New York Attorney General’s case against the NRA. In response, the NRA’s new lawyers from Baker & Hostetler LLP requested a pre-motion conference and permission of the court to voluntarily dismiss the case with prejudice.

The response from Col. North opposing the voluntary dismissal may give some indication as to what will come up in his new lawsuit.

The NRA intends to dismiss their case after the damage has been done to Col. North (and the NRA), and retreat as quietly as possible, whereas Col. North asks, in fairness, for a proper judgment so that a stake is placed into the heart of this protracted campaign by the NRA to use its power and its members’ funds to retaliate against its former President for doing the right thing by reporting misconduct and seeking a proper course correction.

Col. North was seeking a judgment on the merits showing that he was a whistleblower who suffered retaliation from the NRA.

The NRA used an ethics complaint filed by Tom King against Col. North as the basis of its lawsuit. The complaint accused Col. North of a number of ethical and fiduciary breeches that came to a head at the 2019 NRA Annual Meeting when King accuses North of trying to “extort” Wayne LaPierre in order to keep his position as President of the NRA. He contends that North’s desire to investigate the billings of the Brewer law firm were motivated by greed and to keep his multi-million dollar contract with Ackerman-McQueen. Bear in mind that it did come out later that not only was the NRA aware of the contract, the Audit Committee approved it and Wayne himself help negotiate it on North’s behalf. King called the request to examine Brewer’s billings “not only unwarranted but unprecedented.”

I could go on but you can read it for yourself below. If anyone should be the target of an ethics complaint it should be the author of this complaint for its baseless allegations of “extortion”, “greed”, and “blackmail.” One can only hope the voting members of the NRA see through King and do not return him to the Board of Directors. We will find that out next week when the 2025 Board of Directors’ election results are released. The sad reality is that it will be left to the reformers to clean up the mess left by the departed parties including Wayne, Brewer, and the rest.

King ethics complaintDownload

Uncategorized

It Is All In The Wording Of The Question

April 2, 2025 by

I received a press release this afternoon from Everytown saying 77% of North Carolinians oppose permitless carry. They are basing this on a poll by Elon University on behalf of Everytown.

Today, Everytown for Gun Safety released recent polling that shows a significant majority (77%) of residents in North Carolina oppose permitless carry. This comes as lawmakers are attempting to pass HB 5 and SB 50, bills that would dismantle North Carolina’s existing concealed carry permitting laws and allow individuals to carry concealed, hidden guns in public spaces without a permit—effectively eliminating all safeguards put in place by the current permitting system, including a background check, safety training, and live-fire training.

One advantage of my years ago graduate training in political science is that I know the results are all dependent upon how you word the question.

So how did the Elon University poll word the question and what were the real results?

Currently, North Carolina requires a permit to carry a concealed handgun. This permit involves an application fee, safety training and a background check. The General Assembly is considering a change to allow concealed carry without a permit. Do you support or oppose removing the requirement of a permit to legally carry a concealed handgun?

    The actual opposition based upon the poll question was 54% and not the aforementioned 77%. Republicans and independents were more likely than Democrats to support permitless concealed carry.

    I wonder what the results might have been if the third sentence read, “The General Assembly is considering a change to allow concealed carry without a permit like 29 other states.” The question could have gone on to add that open carry without a permit is a constitutional right in North Carolina thanks to State v. Kerner (1921).

    According to Elon University, they surveyed 800 people and the poll has a margin of error of 4%. Other questions in the poll dealt with the renaming of Fort Liberty back to Fort Bragg, tax rates, response to Hurricane Helene, trust in the NC Supreme Court, and approval of Gov. Josh Stein (D-NC). Nowhere in the release on the poll does it give the actual numbers of people sampled by party, race, or sex. In other words, we do not know if the poll was overweighted with Democrats or women who were more likely to favor gun control.

    While polls do have their usefulness, constitutional rights should never be governed by polls or popular opinion.

    Uncategorized

    International Whisk(e)y Day

    March 27, 2025 by

    March 27th is International Whisk(e)y Day. This is different from World Whisky Day or National Bourbon Day. The date was chosen in 2008 to honor British whisky journalist and author Michael Jackson who had passed away the year before. March 27th was chosen for the occasion as it was Jackson’s birthday.

    This year the day will be celebrating Japanese whisky according to what I’ve read. I must admit I have never tasted any Japanese whisky. My understanding is that the Japanese distillers learned their craft from the Scots.

    UPDATE: I am trying to work down my open bottles of bourbon before I open a new bottle. Looking through my collection I found a half-full bottle of Col. E. H. Taylor and that was my dram last night. I thought that was special enough for International Whisk(e)y Day.

    Uncategorized

    NRA Loses In Court In Tennessee

    March 27, 2025 by 3 Comments

    US District Court Judge William Campbell, Jr., issued an order today denying the NRA’s motions to dismiss the case brought against it by David Dell’Aquila and others. The case, Dell’Aquila et al v. National Rifle Association, is being heard in the Middle District of Tennessee was originally filed in August 2019. The case originally also included Wayne LaPierre and the NRA Foundation as defendants but they were dropped from the case in 2020. This case has had numerous delays due to the NRA’s abortive filing for bankruptcy, changes of attorneys, and numerous extensions of time. It was revived in August 2022 when Dell’Aquila engaged the Chicago firm of Loevy & Loevy and the Nashville office of Stites & Harbison.

    As I reported earlier this month, William Brewer and Brewer, Attorneys and Counselors, withdrew from the case as of March 5th and were replaced with the Nashville firm of Neal and Harwell PLC. However, it should be noted that all the motions filed on behalf of the NRA that were denied today came from the Brewer firm.

    The NRA had moved to dismiss the Third Amended Complaint which had been filed in June 2024. They had also moved for oral argument and for a stay on discovery pending the outcome of their motion to dismiss. As noted above, Judge Campbell denied the motion to dismiss. He also denied the motion for oral argument on the motion to dismiss and said the motion to stay discovery was now moot.

    The Third Amended Complaint accused the NRA of the following and the NRA had moved to dismiss all allegations.

    In the Third Amended Complaint, Plaintiffs bring claims against the NRA for fraud, breach of contract, tortious interference with contract, violation of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (“RICO”), 18 U.S.C. § 1961, et seq., and RICO conspiracy. The NRA seeks to dismiss all claims under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6).

    Judge Campbell noted that the standard for review of a motion to dismiss is that a court must take all factual allegations as true. He found that Dell’Aquila had sufficiently alleged the facts for fraud. The amended complaint had added the claims of breach of contract and tortious interference. He found there was sufficient factual allegations made earlier in the case to support the relation back of amendments. The NRA had contended they were not on notice to argue breach of contract or tortious interference because Dell’Aquila didn’t say earlier there was a contract with the NRA or the NRA Foundation.

    Plaintiffs argue they have adequately alleged a claim for breach of contract. Plaintiffs point to allegations that the NRA mails a dues renewal notification to all members that includes a “Uniform Disclosure Statement” which states that “Contributions raised will be used to advance the mission of the NRA.”The NRA also solicits donations through its website, which contains the same statement. Plaintiffs contend this statement sets forth a contractual promise to use donated funds to advance the mission of the NRA, that Plaintiffs and other donors accepted this offer by sending donations, and that the NRA breached the promise by using the solicited funds for purposes not in furtherance of the NRA’s mission….

    Plaintiffs have plausibly alleged a claim for breach of contract based on the NRA’s
    solicitation of donations with the express promise that any donations would be used to further its
    mission and its use of donated funds for purposes unrelated to that mission.

    We have heard in the past that significant loans were made by the NRA Foundation to the NRA itself. We also heard in the New York case how significant personal expenditures were disguised through the use of credit cards issued by Ackerman McQueen. This has come back to bite the NRA and has allowed Dell’Aquila’s claim of tortious interference to stand.

    Finally, there are the charges of RICO and RICO conspiracy.

    As discussed above, Plaintiffs have sufficiently alleged a RICO claim. With regard to
    Defendant’s second argument, Plaintiffs point to allegations that the NRA “agree[d] to participate
    in the conduct of the affairs of the NRA Foundation enterprise through a pattern of racketeering
    activity,” specifically, that NRA had a “decades-long arrangement pursuant to which the NRA
    solicited funds through the [NRA Foundation] under false pretenses, transferred those funds to the
    NRA, and laundered them through Ackerman [McQueen] to support Mr. LaPierre’s extravagance.” For purposes of the motion to dismiss, these allegations are sufficient to plausibly allege that the NRA “objectively manifested an agreement to participate” in the RICO enterprise.

    It should be pointed out that none of Dell’Aquila’s charges have been proven but there is enough there that the case goes on. More importantly, Dell’Aquila and his fellow plaintiffs will be allowed to engage in discovery which, to be honest, could prove very embarrassing to the NRA. While Wayne is gone as is Tyler Schropp and Doug Hamlin has started to clean house at the NRA, the NRA Foundation is still dominated by the old guard. They were put in place to do Wayne’s bidding including the sweetheart loans between the NRA and the NRA Foundation. These loans were sufficiently problematic that the Attorney General of the District of Columbia brought suit and the Foundation eventually entered into a consent decree.

    Judge Campbell’s memorandum is embedded below:

    Dell’Aquila v NRA opinionDownload
    Uncategorized

    Time Is Running Out

    March 26, 2025 by

    Time is running out to get your ballots in to the NRA’s tabulator. They must be received by April 6th. If you haven’t mailed your ballot yet, you need to do so now.

    The question often asked is “can I vote online” and the answer unfortunately is no. That is one of the things I will be working to change as I have written about in the past.

    Uncategorized

    House Judiciary Committee Meets On Many 2A Bills

    March 25, 2025 by 2 Comments

    The House Judiciary Committee will meet tomorrow, March 25th, to markup or consider a number of bills related to the Second Amendment that will then be passed on to the full House of Representatives. Included are bills extending protection to knife owners, concealed carry reciprocity, and providing due process to people who have denied NICS checks.

    WASHINGTON, D.C. – The House Judiciary Committee will hold a markup on Tuesday, March 25, 2025, at 10:00 a.m. ET in 2141 Rayburn House Office Building.

    Legislation to be considered includes:

    • H.R. 60, the Knife Owners’ Protection Act of 2025;
    • H.R. 2243, the LEOSA Reform Act of 2025; 
    • H.R. 2240, the Improving Law Enforcement Officer Safety and Wellness Through Data Act of 2025;
    • H.R. 2255, the Federal Law Enforcement Officer Service Weapon Purchase Act;
    • H.R. 38, the Constitutional Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act;
    • H.R. 2267, the NICS Data Reporting Act; and
    • H.R. 2184, the Firearm Due Process Protection Act

    WATCH: The markup will be live streamed here.

    HR 60 is essentially the equivalent for knife owners of FOPA 1986 which allows free travel of locked away knives. An exception is made for emergency knives used to cut seat belts.

    HR 38 has been introduced multiple times by Rep. Richard Hudson (R-NC). The bill will allow people with a concealed carry permit OR are allowed to carry without a permit in their home state to carry in any other state that either issues carry permits or allows carry by its citizens. In other words, everywhere in the United States so long as the person is not a prohibited person. Restrictions on places where carry is permitted could vary from state to state.

    HR 2267 requires the Attorney General to issue a report of the demographics of those deemed ineligible to purchase a firearm based upon a denial by the NICS check system.

    Finally, HR 2184 would force the FBI to correct erroneous data in the NICS System within 60 days. A denied person could challenge their denial in court with the burden of proof on the respondent aka the FBI. If successful, attorneys fees are to be paid by the respondent.

    It looks like the Republicans are finally getting serious about moving Second Amendment legislation. Now it is time to do “debanking” and the Hearing Protection Act.

    Uncategorized

    13 Days To Go – Don’t Be Late!

    March 25, 2025 by

    There are 13 days left until the ballots for the NRA Board of Director election must be received with the tabulating firm in Dun Loring, Virginia. As the factoid below from the Falls Township Rifle and Pistol Association illustrates, enough ballots were received late that they could have impacted the outcome of the election for some candidates.

    If you have not voted yet, dig that February issue of the NRA magazine out of that pile of mail you put aside to read later. I would urge you in the strongest possible terms to vote for the NRA 2.0 reform ticket. You can find a list of the candidates here. Do not vote for more than 28 candidates total! Don’t forget to vote for the two write-in candidates – Paul Babaz of Atlanta, GA and Charles Brown of Dayton, OH. You must include their cities of residence.

    To get an idea of how long it would take for your ballot to arrive in Dun Loring, VA, I ran the estimated times of delivery for a ballot sent tomorrow morning for a number of US cities. Rural areas will probably take even longer. In my experience, estimated times of delivery are the best case.

    • From Los Angeles, Monday, March 31st
    • From Anchorage, Monday, March 31st
    • From Houston, Saturday, March 29th
    • From St. Louis, Friday, March 28th
    • From Chicago, Friday, March 28th
    • From NYC, Friday, March 28th
    • From Atlanta, Friday, March 28th

    Thus, it will take anywhere from three to six days for delivery from the time you mail the ballot. Even if you mailed it from Fairfax County, VA, it will take two days. If you wait until next Monday to mail it, you might make it but I would not count on it.

    Uncategorized

    Spam Comment Of The Day

    March 22, 2025 by 1 Comment

    I have comment moderation enabled because I get so many spam comments. They usually involve CBD gummies or are in Russian cyrillic or have a link to some suspicious website. Occasionally however I do get one that makes me laugh.

    Hi! Someone in my Myspace group shared this website with us so I came to check it out.
    I’m definitely loving the information. I’m bookmarking and
    will be tweeting this to my followers! Outstanding blog and superb design.

    MySpace? When was the last time in this decade have you ever heard of anyone even mentioning MySpace? I had to check to see if it still existed! It actually does amazingly enough.

    That comment, by the way, came from “Anek Baki” on Walt Walter’s obituary. Is it any wonder that I considered it spam and trashed it.

    Uncategorized

    ILA Alert On S.50

    March 20, 2025 by

    I had a nice chat yesterday with John Commerford who is the Executive Director of NRA-ILA. I had sent him an email earlier to ask about the NRA’s position on S.50- Freedom to Carry NC. He expressed they had some reservations which you read in the release below. Those reservations center around the fact that the bill is a bit more restrictive on who can carry than the law is on who can purchase a firearm. His feeling was that some may presume they can carry just because they could purchase a handgun and would be caught unawares. These are valid points and things that may be fixed in the final bill.

    I will note that Sarah Kettle, ILA’s state director for NC, did testify in favor of the bill at the Senate Rules Committee yesterday.

    From ILA:

    Yesterday, Senate Bill 50 (SB 50), a permitless carry bill sponsored by Senator Britt and Senator Settle, passed favorably out of the Senate Judiciary Committee with amendments. The bill is now headed to the Senate Rules and Operations Committee for further consideration.

    SB 50 would recognize your right to carry a concealed firearm for self-defense without seeking government permission by eliminating the requirement that law-abiding gun owners obtain a permit to carry. The NRA strongly supports constitutional/permitless carry, however SB 50 still has some pitfalls that could entrap well intentioned gun owners. SB 50 as written creates scenarios in which a person could lawfully purchase and possess a firearm but would be prohibited from carrying that firearm for self-defense purposes. The NRA is committed to working with the sponsor and willing lawmakers to improve this legislation and help make North Carolina the 30th constitutional carry state!